Jurnal Full paper

Teknologi
(Social Sciences)

Understanding the Blended Learning Experiences of English Language

Teachers in a Distance TESL Degree Programme in Malaysia
Lee Kean Waha*, Tan Choon Keonga, Denis Lajiuma, Ng Shi Inga
a
School of Education and Social Development, University Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu, 88400, Sabah, Malaysia

*Corresponding author: keanwah@gmail.com

Article history Abstract

Received :1 July 2013 In an effort to improve the status and the professional qualification of non-graduate primary school teachers,
Received in revised form : the Ministry of Education, Malaysia recently mandated a large scale change effort to upgrade non-graduate
1 September 2013 teachers to become graduate teachers via a a specially designed distant education degree programme, called
Accepted :15 October 2013 the Graduate Programme for Teachers (Program Pensiswazahan Guru also known as PPG in Malay
language) using a blended format involving part face-to-face (F2F) and distance learning. This paper
examines the learning experiences of the first cohort of TESL teachers undergoing the blended learning
(BL) courses. Specifically, learning experiences were examined in the form of (1) the in-service teachers
perception towards the BL approach, and (2) the learning experiences supporting or impeding their learning
using the BL approach. To gain an appreciation of the in-service teachers experience with the BL system,
both qualitative and quantitative techniques were used, namely a survey consisting of open and closed
questions, focus groups interviews and reflective journals. Findings revealed the teachers generally have
positive perceptions of the blended course design. However, when viewed through the theoretical lens of
Activity Theory (AT), data revealed tensions both between and within the components of the activity system
in the BL environment. The paper concludes that further fine-tuning needs to be taken to ameliorate the
challenges faced, particularly the contradictions and tensions involving issues related to willingness and
attitudes towards learning the courses (object/outcome component); Schoology and learning materials
(Mediating tools); collaboration (Rules) and opinions related to teachers presence (Division of Labour).

Keywords: Blended learning; distance learning degree; learning experiences; schoology learning
management system; activity theory

Abstrak

Dalam usaha meningkatkan status dan pencapaian akademik guru-guru bukan siswazah sekolah rendah,
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia baru-baru ini telah melancarkan usaha perubahan besar-besaran untuk
menaik taraf guru-guru bukan siswazah untuk menjadi guru-guru siswazah menerusi program pendidikan
jarak jauh khas yang dipanggil Program Pensiswazahan Guru (PPG). Program ini menggunakan format
teradun yang melibatkan kedua-dua pembelajaran bersemuka (face-to-face, F2F) dan juga pembelajaran
jarak jauh. Kertas ini mengkaji pengalaman pembelajaran yang dialami para kohort pertama guru TESL
yang menjalani kursus-kursus berasaskan pembelajaran teradun (BL). Pengalaman pembelajaran dikaji
dari segi (1) persepsi guru-guru dalam perkhidmatan terhadap pendekatan BL, dan (2) pengalaman
pembelajaran yang menyokong atau menghalang mereka daripada menggunakan pendekatan BL. Untuk
menghayati pengalaman guru-guru dalam perkhidmatan mengenai sistem BL, teknik kualitatif dan
kuantitatif telah digunakan, iaitu soal selidik yang mengandungi soalan-soalan terbuka dan tertutup, temu
bual berfokus, dan jurnal reflektif. Dapatan menunjukkan guru-guru mempunyai persepsi positif terhadap
kursus teradun tersebut. Namun begitu, melalui kanta mata Teori Aktiviti (AT), data menunjukkan
ketegangan kedua-dua komponen dalaman dan luaran bagi sistem aktiviti persekitaran BL tersebut. Kertas
ini menyimpulkan bahawa terdapatnya keperluan untuk penyelarasan teliti bagi memperbaiki cabaran-
cabaran yang dihadapi, terutamanya percanggahan dan ketegangan yang melibatkan isu-isu berkaitan
dengan kesediaan dan sikap terhadap pembelajaran kursus (komponen Objek/Hasil); Schoology dan bahan
pembelajaran (Alat pengantaraan); kolaborasi (Peraturan) dan pandangan yang berkaitan dengan
kewujudan pengajar (Pembahagian kerja).

Kata kunci: Pembelajaran teradun; ijazah pembelajaran jarak jauh; pengalaman pembelajaran; sistem
pengurusan pembelajaran schoology; teori aktiviti

2013 Penerbit UTM Press. All rights reserved.

65:2 (2013) 5565 | www.jurnalteknologi.utm.my | eISSN 2289-5434 |

56 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Education is widely recognised as the bedrock of all nation-
building efforts, in particular, in producing high quality human
capital towards achieving a nations vision. In order to produce
excellent human resources to keep pace with the increasingly
competitive global economy, comprehensive and practical
strategies are needed. Like all countries in the world, Malaysia
takes pride in her relentless efforts at improving the quality of her
education system. At the heart of all education changes viz-a-viz
quality improvement is to improve the quality of teaching and
learning, and one of the ways that was identified was to raise the
academic qualification of serving teachers.
In cognizance of the need to improve the quality of education
in Malaysia, a specially designed distant education degree
programme, called the Graduate Programme for Teachers
(Program Pensiswazahan Guru (PPG) in Malay language) was
initiated by the Teacher Education Division, Ministry of Education
Malaysia with the intention to scale-up the academic qualification
of non-graduate teachers and to enhance the quality of teaching,
learning, and management in Malaysian schools (Teacher
Education Division, MOE, 2012). The PPG programme is a
collaborative endeavour between the Teacher Education Division
(TED) of the Ministry of Education Malaysia, with a number of
local Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), namely Teacher
Education Institutes (TEIs), and Education faculties of public and
private universities throughout the country. Initiated in 2009 and
approved in 2010, the PPG programme is offered to non-graduate
teachers below the age of 47 years to upgrade and enhance
themselves. The PPG programme is funded by the Malaysian
government based on budget allocated under the Tenth Malaysian
Plan (2011 to 2015). This massive programme is estimated to
involve about 100000 in-service teachers, 8686 secondary school
teachers and 91171 primary school teachers. It is targeted that by
the end of 2015, 90 percent of all secondary school teachers and 60
percent of primary school teachers will be graduate teachers
(Teacher Education Division, MOE, 2012).
Due to the amount of investment involved and the scale of in-
service teachers involvement, an in-depth study on such an
initiative is timely. This paper reports on an attempt to understand
the learning experiences of the first cohort of TESL teachers, who
were pursuing the degree of English Language for Primary Schools
(TESL major), one of the major options offered by Universiti
Malaysia Sabah (UMS) in East Malaysia. Besides the English
Language major, UMS also offers majors such as Teaching of
Mathematics and Science and Teaching of History and Geography.
Specifically it examines the learning experiences of the first cohort
of TESL teachers via the blended approach to learning. Learning
experiences were examined in the form of (1) the in-service
teachers perception towards the BL approach, and (2) the learning
experiences supporting or impeding their learning using the BL
approach.
It is hoped that the findings obtained will help throw more
light into what works and what does not work in a blended learning
environment in order to better understand the affordances and
challenges faced in the introduction of the blended learning
environment. Findings obtained from this study not only provide
useful feedback regarding the teachers/students learning
experiences and course delivery, but also feed-forward to
improving students' future learning and future course planning,
implementation and evaluation.
1.1 What Is Blended Learning?
Blended learning (BL) is not a new phenomenon, particularly in the
context of higher education. According to the Centre for
Educational Research and Innovation, blended learning courses are
becoming increasingly significant to complement, not replace,
traditional forms of teaching (Mitchell & Forer, 2010). According
to Garrison and Kanuka (2004), BL is a combination of traditional
face-to-face (FTF) classes with web-based material. It describes a
learning environment that either combines teaching methods,
delivery methods, media formats or a mixture of all these. It also
refers to the integrated learning activities such as a mixture of
online and face-to-face learning (Moebs & Weibelzahl, 2006). To
Leakey and Ranchoux, (2006: 264) blended learning by definition
is almost eclectic. Singh (2003) elaborated BL as a set of learning
strategies or dimensions that mixes various event-based activities,
including traditional instructor-led training, synchronous online
conferencing or training and asynchronous self-paced study.
Sharpe et al. (2006) pointed out that the term BL is quite difficult
to define; it can mean different things to different people,
institutions, or organisations. Generally, the various meanings of
BL can be summarised to two definitions as follows:
1) the integration of traditional learning with web-based on-
line approaches; and
2) the combination of a number of pedagogical approaches,
irrespective of the learning technology used.
Based on the two common definitions, BL can be described as
a hybrid learning model where more than one delivery mode is used
to optimise the learning outcomes. BL often brings
together traditional learning and e-learning modes. Figure 1
constructs the spectrum of delivery mode in terms of time and
space, and illustrates the relationship between traditional learning,
e-learning and blended learning. As shown in Figure 1, the one-
place-same-time traditional face-to-face classroom teaching fits at
one end of the spectrum of the learning delivery mode, then pure e-
learning fits on the other end. The traditional learning style offers
the learner face-to-face contact and support, whereas e-learning can
be delivered anywhere, anytime (asynchronously), for example at
the learner's home or workplace. BL overlaps with both ends of the
spectrum and occupies a wide range in the middle.
One Place, Anywhere,
Same time Multiple Places, Same Time Anytime
and different Time
Face-to-face
Classroom Distance Learning
Teaching
Blended Learning
Source: Modified from Maguire and Zhang (2006)
Figure 1 Spectrum of delivery mode
There are numerous claims being made about the advantages
of BL. Singh (2010) argues that BL resource provides greater
opportunities to comprehend and extend the knowledge presented.
In a study using BL with in-service teachers, Abraham (2007)
posits BL provides in-service teachers with more control over
learning and helps foster critical thinking. However, little research
has been done into BL in undergraduate studies, particularly with
in-service teachers. Thus far, published studies have tended to
focus on the different methods of teaching and on the innovation
introduced (Sharpe & Benfield, 2005), but not much serious
attention has been given to students experiences with this type of
learning (Lim & Morris, 2009). The use of ICT in higher education,
particularly with in-service teachers requires an evaluation of the
57 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565

contribution of these tools to teachers learning, especially when
they are used as a complement to the more conventional F2F
methods (Ginns & Ellis, 2009). Therefore, the main purpose of the
study is to examine the in-service teachers experiences of the BL
process. Specifically, the learning experiences were examined in
the form of (1) the in-service teachers perception towards the BL
approach, and (2) the learning experiences supporting or impeding
their learning using the BL approach.
1.2 Research Questions
To this end, two main research questions were formulated, namely:
(1) What are the in-service teachers perceptions towards the
BL approach?
(2) What learning experiences supported or impeded the
teachers learning via the BL approach?
2.0 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
sources of change or development. Kuutti (1996) was attributed for
coining the term, and he defines contradiction as a misfit within
elements, between them, between different activities, or between
different developmental phases of a single activity. Engestrm
(1987) proposed four levels of contradictions (1) primary, (2)
secondary, (3) tertiary and (4) quaternary. Primary contradictions
can occur within the elements of activity systems (e.g., within the
community), while secondary contradictions may arise between the
elements of an activity system (e.g. between the community and
subject). Tertiary contradictions, on the other hand, arise when
activity participants face situations where they have to use an
advanced method to achieve an objective (e.g., when they are
introduced a new technology). Finally quaternary contradictions
occur between the central activity system and outside activity
systems. In the context of our research, the contradictions that
emerged within and between (primary and secondary) the elements
of the activity system are illustrated in Figure 2. In other words,
AT provides the researchers with a tool to analyse the opportunities
afforded and the challenges faced in the introduction of the blended
learning environment.

2.1 Using Activity Theory to Understand In-Service Teachers MEDIATING TOOLS

Learning Experiences of Blended Learning Courses (e.g, books, lectures,
tutorials, LMS, OUTCOME:
Activity Theory (hereafter AT) has been used quite widely as a Schoology, etc) Applicable
knowledge of
theoretical framework for the study of tensions and contradictions
Teaching L&S and
in an activity system. First developed by Leont'ev (1981), and literature
realised as Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (Cole, 1996), it SUBJECTS: In-
provides a tool for theoretical understanding of conflict, friction, service teachers
contradictions and inconsistencies both between and within learning TESL OBJECT:
components of an activity system (Engestrm, 1987, 1999; Blin & courses registered implicit and
Munro, 2008). When it comes e-learning, we are aware of studies for - TE10103, explicit rules that
which have focused on the tensions arising from e-learning TE10303 structure social
implementations but without explicit reference to AT (e.g. Duffy interaction (What
& Kirkley, 2004). There has also been some speculation about the to learn?)
use of AT as a theoretical framework for e-learning (Oliver et al.,
2007; Dyke et al., 2007; Wold, 2011) as well as attempts to embed
it in e-learning tools (Joyes, 2006) but AT has not yet been
systematically applied to the study of blended learning, with the
exception of Wold (2011) who proposes the SEEP instructional RULES (incl. norms COMMUNITY: DIVISION OF
& values governing The in-service LABOUR: The various
design model for blended learning writing courses for English supporting roles
the running of the teachers, lecturers
language learners (ELLs), and Gedera and Williams (2013) who accepted by the in-
courses and the in- and individuals
examined contradictions in an online university course facilitated service teachers involved in the service teachers,
by moodle in New Zealand. Both studies by Wold (2011), and behavior learning the running of the lecturers, and support
Gedera and Williams (2013) took place in the Western contexts, courses. courses. personnel learning the
which socio-culturally is different from that of Malaysia. courses (who does
In order to understand the in-service teachers experiences of what?)
the BL courses, we adopted Engestrms (1987, 1999) cultural-
historical activity theory that introduces six important dimensions, Figure 2 The main components of an activity system
along with the dynamics among them: Subject, Object (the goal of
the activity system), Norms, Division of Labour, Community and
Instruments. Applying this framework to a university classroom in 3.0 METHODOLOGY
its day to day operations, we could assign the in-service teachers to
the dimension Subject, the learning goals for the in-service 3.1 Participants
teachers to the dimension Object, the implicit and explicit rules
that structure social interaction to the dimension Norms, the A total of 122 in-service English teachers participated in the study.
prescribed roles of the lecturers and the in-service teachers to the These teachers were the first cohort non-graduate in-service
dimension Division of Labour, the group of in-service teachers teachers currently studying for a specially tailored 4-year degree
and their lecturers to the dimension Community and different course in TESL in the School of Education and Social
educational tools to the dimension Instruments. AT is used as an Development, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Sabah, Malaysia. These
investigative tool to analyse the blended learning environment in teachers teach English Language at the primary level in Borneo,
the form of tensions, frustrations, misunderstandings and Sabah. Their age ranges from late-20s to mid-40s. All of them have
miscommunication experienced by the teachers in undertaking the been English teachers for at least one year, with an average of 12
distance degree. years experience. For the majority of the in-service teachers, this
These contradictions may create conflicts, interruptions and was their first experience in using an e-learning platform, although
misunderstandings. However, if they are resolved they can also be most had previously informally used the web to gather information,
58 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565

or prepare coursework in schools or second-level education, prior 3.4 Instruments

to entering university.
To probe the teachers learning experiences, both quantitative and
3.2 Course Design and Modules qualitative data were collected via questionnaire, reflective
journals, and focus group interviews. The survey, focus groups
This paper focuses on the two TESL courses over two semesters in interviews, and reflective journals gathered the most relevant data
2012, namely TW10103 Teaching of Listening and Speaking Skills of in-service teachers experiences of the blended learning process,
and TW10203 Introduction to Literature, that the teachers as well as the challenges faced in learning how to learn in a blended
undertook Each course was delivered by using a blended learning environment.
approach which involves 120 hours of student learning time (SLT),
and was typically organised based on (a) 30 hours of self-
preparation which involves reading of course module and
completing exercises on it; (b) 20 hours of face-to-face intensive
lectures and tutorials; (c) 22 hours of e-learning which takes the
form of online tasks such as discussion forum, interactive quizzes
hosted on an LMS with social networking capabilities called
Schoology; (d) 33 hours spend on completing an assignment to
produce digital storytelling to be used in the teaching of Listening
and Speaking or Teaching of Literature; (e) 15 hours on
examination revision and exam taking. Table 1 summarises the
allocation of study hours for each course.

Table 1 Allocation of study hours

Activity No of
hours
Reading the module and completing the exercises (10 30
topics, each of 3 hour duration)
Attending 3 F2F lecture and tutorial sessions (each of 20
6 hours and 40 minutes duration)
E-learning comprising participating in online 22
discussion, online discussion forum, and online
quizzes.
Completing a DST assignment to teach Listening & 33
Speaking and or Teaching of Literature
Revision (12 hours) and Examination (3 hours) 15
Total 120 hours
3.3 Schoology Learning Management System
The main e-learning platform used was the free web-based
Learning Management System, known as Schoology. Schoology
was preferred to the universitys moodle-based Learning
Management System (SmartUMS) due to two principal reasons.
Firstly, Schoology is easier to access from remote areas where most
of the teachers are based, compared to campus-based LMS
(SmartUMS) due to the stringent firewall restrictions imposed by
the universitys LMS server. Secondly, the participants preferred
Schoology because it offers social networking features (see Figure
3), much akin to the popular Facebook tool used by most of the
teachers. Principally, Schoology consists two main contexts 1)
interactive communication and 2) academic information exchange
(Manning et al., 2011). The facility for interactive communication
permits teachers to create discussion questions, collaborative
groups for assignments that allow some kind of dynamic interaction
among the in-service teachers and their teachers. As for the second
aspect of academic information exchange, Schoology provides the
in-service teachers the opportunity to access their grades,
attendance records, and teacher feedback on electronically-
submitted assignments. In short, via Schoology, a range of different
e-learning tasks and assessments were included to complement the
traditional intensive face-to-face meetings.
Figure 3 Sample of schoology interface
3.4.1 Quantitative Data Questionnaire
A post-Likert scale questionnaire was designed and used to gather
teachers opinions and views of the BL system (see Appendix A).
At the end of Semester 1 and 2, all the 122 in-service teachers were
given a questionnaire to elicit their feedback of the blended
learning environment. Both online and off-line versions of the
questionnaires were given to all the respondents. The online
version was attached in Schoology and the hard-copy was
distributed at the end of the class. The questionnaire consists of
questions related to their overall impressions of the BL
environment, Schoology, learning materials, and demographic data
of the respondents. A Likert-type scale from 1 to 5 (Strongly
Disagree (SD), Disagree (D), Unsure (U), Agree (A), Strongly
Agree (SA)) was used (the scale is in reverse for negative items). In
total, 40 questionnaires were returned and analysed. The data
obtained from the questionnaires was analysed based on the mean
score of the items.
3.4.2 Qualitative Data Reflective Journal and Focus Group
Interviews
For qualitative data, two data sources were elicited reflective
journals and focus group interviews. The reflective journals helped
chart the teachers reflections in learning the two courses, while
focus-group interviews were conducted as follow-up to the
reflective journals in order to probe deeper into the reflections
made. As discussed in the earlier section, the main heuristic for the
qualitative data was Activity Theory. Thus, in writing their
reflections, participants were specifically asked to focus on the
following dimensions, abstracted from theoretical lens of Activity
theory, namely (a) Subject, i.e., in-service teachers learning the
59 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565

TESL courses; (b) Rules (When and where to learn?), i.e., the Table 2 Frequency and mean score of questionnaire items concerning
implicit and explicit rules that structure social interaction; (c) students' attitude towards BL
Object/Outcome (What to learn?), i.e., learning of the course
content, particularly the Learning outcomes (d) Division of Labour Frequency of response
(Who does what to learn?), i.e., the prescribed roles of the lecturers Items SD D U A SA Mean
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
and the in-service teachers; (e) Community, i.e., the in-service
Attitude towards BL
teachers, lecturers, and other stakeholders in the BL system; and (f) 1 I am in favour of the use of BL to
Mediation tools (How to learn?), i.e., the learning tools (e.g. the 1 0 4 23 12 4.1
this course.
blended learning environment Schoology, and the face-to-face 7 I enjoyed talking to others about
meetings for lectures). 1 3 8 18 10 3.8
BL.
In total, 60 reflective journals were returned and analysed. In 11 BL was a waste of time. 19 18 1 1 0 4.4
the case of focus-group interviews, two voluntary groups of 10 Applying BL for this course was
teachers participated, one group consisting ten teachers and the more delightful and relaxing than 1 2 3 24 9 4.0
other eleven teachers. The focus groups interviews were audiotaped traditional methods.
and transcribed. Both the reflective journals and interview 8 I dont like to take part in this BL
11 22 4 1 1 4.1
transcripts were then analysed by comparing data with data to find process if given a choice.
similarities and differences of common ideas and beliefs and coded
Table 3 Frequency and mean score of questionnaire items concerning
into themes.
students' perception of bl in learning

3.5 Data Analysis

Frequency of response
Items SD D U A SA Mean
Quantitative data were analysed descriptively using SPSS Version
18 to examine teachers perceptions of the BL environment. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Qualitative data were thematically analysed and coded iteratively BL approach in learning
using Nvivo based on criteria of saliency and saturation (Lincoln & 2 Applying BL in teaching this
Guba, 1985). Credibility was addressed based on the techniques of course made me like this 1 0 5 23 11 4.1
prolonged engagement, triangulation, and referential adequacy course better.
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985). To ensure referential adequacy, attempts 3 Applying BL in teaching this
were made to capture and document the data in their original form. course helped me improve
Verbatim quotes were used in some instances to give a flavor of the all my skills (writing, 0 1 3 27 8 4.1
reading, listening, and
teachers experiences in the blended learning environment.
speaking).
4 I find this course easier when
1 1 6 22 10 4.0
applying BL in teaching.
4.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 5 The technique of BL
0 1 4 21 13 4.2
encouraged me to learn.
Findings are presented based on the order of the research questions 6 Applying BL for this course
posited: enhanced the chance for 2 1 5 20 12 4.0
interaction with the teacher.
4.1 What are the In-Service Teachers Perceptions Towards 9 BL helped me learn better. 1 3 0 23 12 4.1
The BL Approach? 12 By applying BL for this
course, the chance of
Based on the 29-item questionnaire that focuses on eliciting 1 2 5 20 12 4.0
interaction with my
perceptions about their overall impressions of the BL environment, classmates was enhanced.
Schoology learning management system, and learning materials, 13 With BL, I get access to both
the findings revealed that a vast majority of the teachers had printed and online materials
1 0 1 23 15 4.3
positive perceptions of the blended course design and Schoology as which helped me learn
better.
a platform for learning.
14 Watching YouTube videos
The efficacy of the BL approach all received resounding and getting engaged in 2 0 7 21 9 3.9
endorsements from the students (see Table 2). For example, Items discussion forums.
1, 7 and 10 which have a mean score of about 4, indicates that the 15 Doing online quiz. 0 3 2 23 11 4.1
students have positive attitudes towards the BL approach that they
have gone through. 17 The discussion forums
increased my writing 0 2 3 19 15 4.2
In terms of the perception of the benefits of BL to their
abilities.
learning, they also indicated that they have gained some 18 The discussion forums were
improvement in their learning (Table 3). More than half of the 0 1 3 23 12 4.2
interesting.
students indicated that they have improved in their skill in writing, 19 The discussion forums didnt
reading, listening, and speaking (Item 3, mean score 4.1; Item 17 encourage me to interact 11 23 1 4 0 4.1
mean score 4.2). These responses seemed to agree with the with my classmates.
responses indicated in Item 6, 9, 12, 13, 14, and 15 (mean score 20 The BL content encouraged
0 1 2 27 9 4.1
more than 4), that BL approach has facilitated them in their learning me to learn.
through the interaction with the teacher and classmates, and the
resources that were provided. Furthermore, students also responded
that the BL approach has positive impact in their motivation in Likewise, items focusing on the learning platform used
learning, by being encouraged to learn as shown in Item 5, 18, and (Schoology) were also positively endorsed. As shown in Table 4,
20. the application of the Schoology platform in BL indicated that it
consisted of ease of use features (Item 24, 26 and 27), and
60 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565

indicated to have improved the technological skills (Item 23, and This theme recorded the highest number of counts, totalling 96
28). instances. It appears the course activities and the BL learning
approach have improved the teachers IT skills and pedagogical
Table 4 Frequency and mean score of questionnaire items concerning skills significantly.
students' perception of schoology in BL
Table 5 Qualitative data: coded themes and categories
Frequency of response
Mea Themes Frequency Categories Frequency
Items SD D U A SA n
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1 Benefits 96 IT skills 60
Application of Schoology Pedagogical 32
in BL Skills
1 Getting to know and use Positive 3
0 0 0 26 13 4.3 Attitudes
6 Schoology.
2 The online activities on Learning skill 1
1 Schoology were related to 2 Affordances 59 NF2F 21
0 0 2 22 15 4.3 Working 38
the course objectives
(ILOs) together
2 I hated using Schoology. 3 Challenges 43 F2F 25
22 17 0 0 0 4.6 Internet 10
2
2 Using Schoology connectivity
3 improved my computer 1 0 2 23 13 4.2 Time 4
skills. Language 4
2 The instructions provided barrier
4 in Schoology were easy to 0 0 1 24 13 4.3 Total 198 198
follow.
2 I got scared when I
5 operated BL techniques on 10 12 10 7 0 3.6
Schoology.
2 Schoology was easy to use.
0 0 2 24 13 4.3
6
2 Schoology was
14 22 1 2 1 4.2
7 complicated.
2 Schoology helped me to
0 1 5 22 11 4.1
8 use internet effectively.
2 I felt my knowledge using
9 Schoology was limited 6 13 13 7 1 3.4
compared to my peers.

Analysis on data from the open-ended items seems to

corroborate with the findings of the closed-ended items. The in-
service teachers pointed to the flexibility that the online component
offers as a major advantage. The any time/anywhere approach
allows them to work whenever it suits them best and when they can
perform most productively. Another aspect of the blended learning
model that was viewed favourably by in-service teachers was the
co-operative learning component. In-service teachers did their
assignments and projects in groups. When experiencing problems
in-service teachers seek assistance within the group while only
approaching the lecturer as a last resort.
4.2 What Learning Experiences Supported Or Impeded
Teachers Learning Using The Bl Approach?
The focus group interviews and reflections were thematically
analyzed in an attempt to understand the blended learning
experiences, viewed in terms of affordances and challenges faced.
Analysis yielded ten categories, grouped under three dominant
themes which are affordances, benefits, and challenges as shown in
Table 5 and Figure 4.
4.2.1 Benefits
The first theme generated is the factor of benefits. Benefits are
defined as the advantages and positives derived from the learning
outcomes of the TESL courses and the BL environment. Grouped
under theme of benefits are the categories of (1) IT skills; (2)
Pedagogical skills; (3) Learning Skills; and (4) Positive attitudes.
Figure 4 Qualitative findings based on Thematic analysis
Besides that a few teachers also claimed they have benefited
in terms of learning skill and having a positive attitude towards
learning. The majority of the teachers appear to acknowledge that
the BL and the assignment given to produce digital storytelling
materials for teaching Listening and speaking and/or teaching of
Literature have improved their technological skills, which in turn
also enhanced their pedagogical skills in their teaching and learning
in the classrooms.
Three things that I benefited most from this course (sic). First
the DST assignment is fantastic and it will really help me in
my teaching in class. Second, I love the module. This is
because the module not only helped me in preparing for my
examination but also to critically reexamine how I teach
phonics skills with my students. Third, I got many useful
resources for my class through this course (S31).
The learning content was really helpful and useful for me. I
learned to integrate technology in my teaching materials such
as creating our own DST and used it as one of my teaching
resources in my classroom which it attracted my pupils'
attention and they enjoyed it (S37).
61 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565
4.2.2 Affordances
The second theme concerned the factor associated with
affordances. An affordance is a quality of an object, or an
environment, which allows an individual to perform an action
(Wikipedia, free encyclopedia). In this study affordances are
attributed to the unplanned outcomes that emerged from the BL
environment. Grouped under the theme of affordances are the
categories of (1) Non-Face-to-face (NF2F), which essentially
concerns with the use of e-learning/mediating tools, and (2)
working together, which relates to the teachers working
collaboratively in learning and supporting one another. This theme
recorded a frequency of 59 counts in total. Under the category of
(1) NF2F, the teachers used a variety of synchronous and
asynchronous tools to get in touch with one another and to get
access to the study materials, and to work together. It appears that
e-learning is used to help them to share knowledge or information,
and to discuss and complete their assignments. Interestingly, the in-
service teachers did not rely exclusively on Schoology, instead they
also used other means of communication such as email, FaceBook,
and SMS text messaging.
Schoology, and Facebook are the effective ways during Non-
Face-to-Face (NF2F) class. As myself, I can accept both
learning tools (face-to-face and LMS) for this course (S08).
I don't face any problem with the blended learning- the F2F
and schoology- it was a good medium of learning for long-
distance students. The schoology, provide us a tools for
discussion even when we were apart. During the F2F, more
new things delivered for example the wikispace (S29).
In the case of category (2) working together, the nature of the
distance education caused them to be creative to work
collaboratively. As all of them are also full time teachers busy with
school work and family commitment and teaching in different parts
of Borneo, they learn to share ideas, knowledge, experiences, and
provided moral support to one another.
During the course, I also had the chance of working
collaboratively doing tasks, assignments and assessments.
Again, I think it was good not only because of the cooperation
given by our group members but also I had the chance to learn
more about how to use emails, facebook and schoology to
discuss our assignments and pass materials to each other.
Since we are in different districts, online collaboration was
great for us. In other words the process of finishing our tasks
and assignments were not just fun but highly informative but
at times challenging in terms of connectivity (S15).
4.2.3 Challenges
The third theme inductively generated relates to the factor of
challenges. Challenges in this study are deemed as learning
experiences that impeded or perceived as problems affecting the
teachers learning experiences. In terms of frequency count, this
theme recorded the smallest number of counts, amounting to 43
instances. The four main categories making up this theme are (1)
F2F, which relates to face-to-face lectures and/or tutorials session
(2) Internet connectivity; (3) Time; and (4) Language barrier. The
F2F category is found to be particularly contradictory in nature. On
the one hand, there are requests for more F2F sessions to support
the teachers learning, while there is another group who preferred
to have fewer F2F sessions. A classic challenge was the Internet
connectivity which seemed to have disrupted their collaboration
and gaining access to the resources provided in the learning
environment, in particular gaining access to Schoology. Language
was also another factor which has dichotomous responses, whereby
a large majority prefer to have English be completely used, and a
smaller group suggesting a mixed-language language approach,
i.e., be allowed to code-switch between English to Malay and vice-
versa wherever and whenever necessary.
It's important to have face-to-face with the lecturers and ask
them directly our needs in our course and of course meet our
friends around Sabah to discuss anything that is unclear (S01).
UMS could use less the time for F2F during the holidayI
don't know about the others but, for me, this is precious time
with my kids sob..sob.. (S22).
I am learning more using Blended Learning using Schoology
this semester. It is easier for students like me to get
information about the courses. This is distance education but
internet connection is very poor. It can be a problem, if I lose
internet connection when Im trying to submit or attend the
quizzes given. This can affect to the results of the quizzes so
sad....(R33).
Findings thus far revealed that the teachers generally have
positive perceptions of the blended course design. The impact of
the blended course on the teachers personal development, and in
particular towards their academic maturity, also emanated
strongly from the focus group discussions. In particular, two
themes seem particularly dominant: (a) BL fosters self-reliance -
much more time is spent on trying exercises independently before
consulting; they learn to trust their own judgment more; and (b) BL
approach helped them to become more independent learners,
particularly in self-learning of the modules, and time management.
However, there were also a number of drawbacks mentioned, in
particular, poor internet connectivity, delayed feedback provided
by tutors and peers in relation to online enquiries and task
discussion.
4.3 Understanding Contradictions and Tensions Using Activity
Theory
Based on the qualitative data analysed and presented, there are a
number of contradictions and tensions exhibited. The findings
revealed these contradictions occurred within and between the
elements of activity systems in this context. These contradictions
include issues related to willingness and attitudes towards learning
the courses, Schoology and learning materials as tools, opinions
related to teachers presence and collaboration (working
together). This analysis revealed four main contradictions, mostly
within the following components of the activity system.
4.3.1 Contradictions within the Object Component
A first tension concerned the object of the BL system, i.e,
acquiring the knowledge of teaching of listening and speaking and
literature in primary schools via the Schoology LMS system and
learning modules. Analysis of reflective journals yielded two
dominant views regarding willingness and attitudes towards
learning. The first concerned a group of learners who seem to want
to learn as much as they can. To them, getting to study in the
university is an opportunity not to be missed. They are keen to get
a deeper understanding of the two courses and therefore were
driven to learn the knowledge, and skills, and attitudes required in
the learning about the Listening and speaking and Literature
courses. As Student 05 puts it,
I have waited a long long time for this opportunity (to study in
the university) so Ill try my best to learn the knowledge and
skills given.
62 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565
Another student (Student 02) commented that
I checked out all the resources put up by the lecturers and my
friends because I wanted to make sure I didn't miss out
something important. They are all important to help me to
understand the courses better and I visited most to see how
they would help me with my assignment and exams.
However, there was also another pertinent group of learners
who seemed just happy to survive the courses, due to reasons of
age, time and logistical constraints faced. Student 17 says
Its too much to study. I find there are too many resources used
the module, assignments, Schoology and online tutorials that
I have to do. Im not that young anymore and studying part
time and travelling for hours to the university can be hard.
From these contradictions, it appears that there are two
different objectives of learning - one that favours learning as much
as possible and another that favours just passing the course.
4.3.2 Contradictions within the Mediating Tools Component
A second tension which emerged from the data set pertained to
mediating tools, in particular those relating to issues of using
Schoology and learning materials. The two courses used a mixed
of printed teaching and learning materials (modules, handouts) and
information and communication resources (Schoology uploaded
lecture notes, tutorial tasks, quizzes, you-tube videos, and online
forum) for the teaching and learning process. When the in-service
teachers were asked about the efficacy of Schoology in supporting
their learning, most expressed positive views and interest to learn
via Schoology. Student 03 says,
Schoology is fun to use and its just like Facebook. I dont have
any problem navigating around. The learning resources are
also easily obtainable with a click of a button.
However, when it was pointed out that some of them had made
minimal (or no) use of the learning resources provided, a number
of the in-service teachers said that they did not mind having a lot
of the resources available, but they felt that the materials provided
were too extensive compared to other courses. As Student 09
remarks:
I feel Im spending too much time on this course already! We
also need to do another 5 courses, so its a lot to try to cope.
So it appears that while in-service teachers did not object to
the availability of material in terms of online resources, they were
overwhelmed by the materials that had been uploaded.
4.3.2 Contradictions within the Rules Component
The third tension which emerged refers to the rules for the BL
approach. Firstly, the in-service teachers were encouraged (a) to
study the printed materials provided in the module and (b) use the
forum to pose questions and problems to the course instructor as
well as discuss any issues which they deemed relevant. As in-
service teachers reported in the interviews, visiting Schoology on a
regular basis to keep up with the course developments posed an
extra burden for them. Student 13 says,
We are not given a specific time for online discussion so
sometimes we need to log on a number of times just to meet
with the lecturer for online discussion. This can be a challenge
as sometimes I cannot get connected because my place has no
internet connectivity. Going to the town centre can be difficult
if the weather is not good.
As opposed to asking questions in class only, in-service
teachers were provided with an opportunity to pose questions in
between classes. However, only a few of questions were posted
throughout the semester and these were basically about extending
the deadlines. The in-service teachers reported that it was more
practical to ask the lecturer than posting questions in the forum.
Student 01 says,
In my opinion nothing can substitute F2F because with the
lecturer present there is real-time communication. I dont have
to wait for a while to get response. Plus getting the chance to
see the lecturer in person is definitely more fun.
The issue of teachers presence seems to be a tension which
needs further examination and resolution. It supported the earlier
qualitative findings where there was disagreement about how much
F2F sessions should be provided.
4.3.3 Contradictions within the Division of Labour Component
The final tension which emerged in the activity system was within
the division of labour. As stated above, in-service teachers were
required to work in small groups of 5-6 to design and develop two
separate teaching and learning packages (consisting of lesson plans
and materials) to teach the Speaking or Listening skills and the
literature component. Collaboration on the project was compulsory
and the main course deliverable was a group and not an individual
one. Collaboration is highly valued in the course because working
together collaboratively is one of the affective domain objectives
in the Programme Learning Outcomes (PLO). The joint creation of
the teaching and learning package required a great deal of
collaboration on the part of the in-service teachers. They need to
divide up their work equitably and as such a lot of discussion and
decisions had to be made.
In the case of task allocation, the lecturers did not interfere in
the group formation and selection. It was done entirely by the
students. It was observed that there were no clear criterion used in-
forming groups, but most reported that group formation was done
mostly on the basis of well-established social relations and locality.
Student 02 says,
most of my team members are from the district of Tambunan
(an interior district in Sabah). Its easier for us to gather
together if needed to. However, we tend to FB one another first
and if we cant solve the problem we will meet in one of our
friends house to discuss.
However, collaboration within groups was not always easy
and smooth, especially when the group members were not close
friends or are situated faraway from one another. Student 05 says,
its not nice to say this but my group is not as collaborative as
some other groups. Although we have 5 members in our group,
mostly it is just the three of use making all the decisions and
doing the work. The other two members seldom reply our texts
or log on to FB for discussion. The excuses they always gave
were there was no line and they staying too far away to meet.
Likewise, the issue of collaboration and student-sharing is
another contradiction which requires further examination and
resolution.
63 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
This study sets out to investigate two main issues; firstly to find out
the extent in which the BL approach which combines the traditional
classroom learning, tutorial with web-based learning help the in-
service teachers in learning the TW10303 Teaching of Listening
and Speaking Skills and TW10103 Introduction to Literature
courses, and secondly to investigate and find out more about the
learning experiences brought about by the BL system. On the basis
of the findings presented and discussed thus far, it appears that the
in-service teachers had positive perceptions of the blended course
design and Schoology as a platform for learning. The findings
seemed to support the positives elements posited by Singh (2010)
that BL resource provides greater opportunities to comprehend and
extent the knowledge presented. Findings also seem to support
Abrahams (2007) study about BL benefiting in-service teachers
with more control over learning and fostering critical thinking.
However, there are a number of areas of concern that need
further attention and fine-tuning if these positive experiences are to
be further enhanced, particularly the contradictions and tensions
involving issues relating to teachers presence (how many F2F
sessions needed) and Internet connectively. Gedera & Williams
(2013) who examined contradictions in an LMS course in New
Zealand found similar contradictions, i.e., problems in
downloading materials and teachers presence may actually
interrupt students to express their opinion.
The use of Activity Theory helps us to understand that the BL
environment is not a static system. Instead it is dynamic and is
always in a state of flux. To ensure effective learning, course
convenors, education service providers and all stakeholders
involved in the initiative have to continuously carry out monitoring
and evaluation of the programme they are offering. Based on the
findings presented, it appears that to optimise successful blending,
efforts need to be expanded to understand the pedagogical
attributes and affordances of new and emerging learning
technologies, the most desirable aspects of face-to-face teaching
and the ways in which these aspects can be appropriately
integrated.
In conclusion, this study, although limiting in its scope and
coverage, has answered Ginns and Ellis (2009) call to practitioners
to evaluate the contribution of ICT tools to teachers learning in
higher education, especially when used as a complement to the
more conventional F2F methods. Thus, for BL to work more needs
to be done than merely implement learning changes. A good
platform to begin is to start understanding the affordances and the
challenges faced in order to come up with solutions that work for
all stakeholders involved.
References
Abraham, A. 2007. Student Centred Teaching of Accounting to Engineering In-
Service Teachers: Comparing Blended Learning with Traditional
Approaches. Proceedings of ASCILITE. 19.
Blin, F. & Munro, M. 2008. Why Hasnt Technology Disrupted Academics
Teaching Practices? Understanding Resistance to Change Through the
Lens of Activity Theory. Computers & Education. 50: 475490.
Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI). 2005. E-learning in
Tertiary Education: Where Do We Stand? Paris: OCDE Publishing.
Cole, M. 1996. Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Duffy, T. M. & Kirkley, J. R. 2004. Learning Theory and Pedagogy Applied in
Distance Learning: The Case of Cardean University. In T. M. Duffy & J.
R. Kirkley (Eds.). Learner-centered Theory and Practice in Distance
Education. Cases From Higher Education Mahwah, New Jersey: LEA.
107141.
Dyke, M., Conole, G., Ravenscroft, A. & de Freitas, S. 2007. Learning theory
and its application to e- learning. In G. Conole & M. Oliver (Eds).
Contemporary Perspectives in E-Learning Research: Themes, Methods
and Impact on Practice. London: Routledge. 8297.
Engestrm, Y. 1987. Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach
to Developmental Research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engestrm, Y. 1990. Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation.
In Y. Engestrm, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamaki, (Eds.). Perspectives on
Activity Theory. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. 1938.
Joyes, G. 2006. An Activity Theory Approach to the Exploration of Tutors'
Perceptions of Effective Online Pedagogy. In L. Markauskaite, P.
Goodyear, & P. Reimann (Eds), Who's learning? Whose Technology?
Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Australiasian Society
for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Sydney: Sydney
University Press.
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney06/proceeding/pdf_papers/
p221.pdf [Viewed 23 January 2013]. 401408.
Leontev, A. 1981. Problems of the Development of Mind. Moscow: Progress.
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. 2004. Blended Learning: Uncovering Its
Transformative Potential in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher
Education. 7(2): 95105.
Gedera, D. S. & Williams, P. J. 2013. Using Activity Theory to Understand
Contradictions in an Online University Course Facilitated by Moodle.
International Journal of Information Technology & Computer Science.
10(1).
Ginns, P., & Ellis, R. A. 2009. Evaluating The Quality of E-Learning at the
Degree Level in the Student Experience of Blended Learning. British
Journal of Educational Technology. 40(4): 652663.
Gulc, E. (2006). Using Blended Learning to Accommodate Different Learning
Styles. Retrieved 5 January 2011.
from:http://www.business.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/landt/learning/blen
ded/gulc.doc
Kuutti, K. 1996. Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for Human Computer
Interaction Research. In B. A. Nardi (Ed.) Context and Consciousness:
Activity Theory and Human Computer Interaction. Cambridge: MIT press.
1744.
Leakey, J. & Ranchoux, A. 2006: BLINGUA. A Blended Language Learning
Approach for CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 19(45):
357372.
Lim, D. H., & Morris, M. L. 2009. Learner and Instructional Factors Influencing
Learning Outcomes within a Blended Learning Environment. Educational
Technology & Society. 12(4): 282293.
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills,
California: Sage Publications.
Manning, C, W. Brooks, V. Crotteau, A. Diedrich, J. Moser, and A.
Zweifelhofer. 2011. Tech Tools for Teacher, by Teachers: Bridging
Teachers and In-Service Teachers. Wisconsin English Journal. 53(1): 24
28.
Maguire, C., & Zhang, J. 2006. Defining Blended Learning in the GDLN
Context. Guide Book on Effective Blended Learning For Development.
Retrieved October 21, 2009. from
http://www.jointokyo.org/files/cms/news/pdf/s3_blended_v6.pdf.
Mitchell, P., & Forer, P. 2010. Blended learning: the perceptions of first-year
geography students. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 34(1):
7789.
Moebs, S. and Weibelzahl, S. 2006. Towards a Good Mix In Blended Learning
for Small and Medium-Sized EnterprisesOutline of a Delphi Study.
Proceedings of the Workshop on Blended Learning and SMEs held in
conjunction with the 1st European Conference on Technology Enhanced
Learning Crete, Greece. 16.
Oliver, M., Roberts, C., Beetham, H., Ingraham, B., Dyke, M. & Levy, P. 2007.
Knowledge, Society and Perspectives on Learning Technology. In G.
Conole & M. Oliver (Eds). Contemporary Perspectives in E-Learning
Research: Themes, Methods and Impact on Practice London: Routledge.
2137.
Sharpe, R., & Benfield, G. 2005. The Student Experience of E-Learning in
Higher Education: A Review of the Literature. Brookes E-Journal of
Learning and Teaching, 1, 3. Retrieved February 19, 2012, from http://
www.brookes.ac.uk/publications/bejlt/volume1issue3/academic/sharpe_benfiel
d .html.
Sharpe, R., Benfield, G. & Francis, R. 2006. Implementing a University E-
Learning Strategy: Levers for Change within Academic Schools. ALT-J.
14(2): 135151.
Singh, H. 2003. Building Effective Blended Learning Program. Educational
Technology. 43(6): 5154.
Singh, T. 2010. Creating Opportunities for Students in Large Cohorts to Reflect
in and on Practice: Lessons Learnt from a Formative Evaluation of
Students Experiences of a Technology-Enhanced Blended Learning
Design. British Journal of Educational Technology. 41(2): 271286.
Teacher Education Division, Ministry of Education Malaysia. 2012. Briefing
about Graduate Teacher Program under 10th Malaysian Plan at Tengku
Ampuan Afzan Institute of Teacher Education. Retrieved August 19, 2013
64 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565

from Wold, K. A. 2011. Blending Theories For Instructional Design: Creating and
https://www.google.com.my/#bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=28d5112040ac5019 Implementing The Structure, Environment, Experience, and People
&q=program+pensiswazahan+guru+sekolah+rendah+ppt. (SEEP) Model. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 24(4): 371382.
65 Lee Kean Wah et al. / Jurnal Teknologi (Social Sciences) 65:2 (2013), 5565

Appendix A Questionnaire
ITEMS SD D DK A SA
1 2 3 4 5
1. I am in favour of the use of BL to this
course
2. Applying BL in teaching this course
made me like this course better.
3. Applying BL in teaching this course
helped me improve all my skills
(writing, reading, listening, and
speaking)
4. I find this course easier when applying
BL in teaching.
5. The technique of BL encouraged me to
learn
6. Applying BL for this course enhanced
the chance for interaction with the
teacher.
7. I enjoyed talking to others about BL.
8. I dont like to take part in this BL
process if given a choice.
9. BL helped me learn better.
10. Applying BL for this course was more
delightful and relaxing than traditional
methods.
11. BL was a waste of time.
12. By applying BL for this course, the
chance of interaction with my
classmates was enhanced
13. With BL, I get access to both printed
and online materials which helped me
learn better
14. Watching you tube videos and getting
engaged in discussion forums
15. Doing online quiz
16. Getting to know and use Schoology
17. The discussion forums increased my
writing abilities.
18. The discussion forums were
interesting.
19. The discussion forums didnt
encourage me to interact with my
classmates.
20. The BL content encouraged me to
learn.
21. The online activities on Schoology
were related to the course objectives
(ILOs)
22. I hated using Schoology
23. Using Schoology improved my
computer skills.
24. The instructions provided in
Schoology were easy to follow.
25. I got scared when I operated BL
techniques on Schoology.
26. Schoology was easy to use
27. Schoology was complicated.
28. Schoology helped me to use internet
effectively.
29. I felt my knowledge using Schoology
was limited compared to my peers.
Open-ended Questions

8. What are the THREE POSITIVE experiences you have of the BL system? Why did
you say so?

9. What are the THREE NEGATIVE experiences you have of the BL system? Why did
you say so?

Thank you for your time and kind cooperation.